32xx movement problem poll and data thread

[Miasma]

waited until 1 year full ownership before submitting my rudimentary data:

model: 124270 explorer

purchased 4/2023
worn every single day. it hasn't stopped running since ownership

Full Wind:
DU +1 297
6U 0 261
9U 0 259
3U 0 260
DD +1 287

24 hours:
DU +3 278
6U -2 245
9U -2 242
3U 0 244
DD +1 272

[saxo3]

First post after 12.5 years; very high 3230 amplitudes, close to 300 degrees, what was the lift angle setting? This watch seems to be very healthy, worn every day!

[Miasma]

Lift angle set at 53. I thought data may add value as I don’t suspect many have worn daily for as long of a stretch.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Miasma

Lift angle set at 53. I thought data may add value as I don’t suspect many have worn daily for as long of a stretch.

What were the timegrapher data when the watch was new (04/2023)?
I think it would be interesting to measure this 3230 along the full power reserve, i.e., after 0,12,24,36,48,60 hours.

[Miasma]

When new, I only checked dial up at full power and not other positions (don’t ask me why) and the amplitude new was 285-292 rate +1-2

I’ll check other positions when I have some time and report back.

[PO.Victory]

Seems like that’s some encouraging data.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by PO.Victory

Seems like that’s some encouraging data.

Yes, after 12 months of ownership, let's wait, he is not the first one reporting encouraging results.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Miasma

I’ll check other positions when I have some time and report back.

That dounds like 2027
Do you know why 5 positions at 0,12,24,36,48,60 is interesting to study?

[krounchou]

My DJ41 from 2018 had to go to RSC in 2021 for the mentioned issue. It’s now doing well. My 126610 from 04/22 is still running very accurate and so is my OP36. Let’s see in the near future.

[whatsthetime?]

My '22 124060 is at RSC being serviced for this issue right now.

[moby]

hello, bit of advice about my batgirl..watch is 2020 and i thought was running fine at +2 a day. Recently tested for power reserve by winding and walking for 6 miles. Thought that would put a full wind into the watch but it ran for 56 hours and not the stated 70 or so hours. Don't have access to a timegrapher unfortunately. Will repeat the test but whats the communities thoughts on this?

[PO.Victory]

What does the AD or the RSC say when you bring in a piece with the issue or when you get it back? Do they say anything other than "hmm, we've seen some people have that issue" or "here you go, fixed"?

[whatsthetime?]

The rep asked what the issue was and I explained that I lost 8sec in ~8hrs after a full wind from a dead stop, and she put down 'power reserve' issue on my receipt

I was also told I would hear from someone explaining what was wrong with my watch in ~a week (it's been 1week today) and that it would take 6-8weeks for the service.

[Toshk]

Originally Posted by PO.Victory

What does the AD or the RSC say when you bring in a piece with the issue or when you get it back? Do they say anything other than "hmm, we've seen some people have that issue" or "here you go, fixed"?

100% of ADs act like they’d never heard of the issue before. Same applies for the RSC personnel.

[Commander C.]

Originally Posted by Toshk

100% of ADs act like they’d never heard of the issue before. Same applies for the RSC personnel.

As far as I know, none of the watch YouTubers have acknowledged the 32XX issue either, even though I'm pretty sure they are aware of the complaints, if only because I've asked several of them to comment on the issue. I assume they don't want to risk provoking the ire of Rolex.

[Toshk]

Originally Posted by Commander C.

As far as I know, none of the watch YouTubers have acknowledged the 32XX issue either, even though I'm pretty sure they are aware of the complaints, if only because I've asked several of them to comment on the issue. I assume they don't want to risk provoking the ire of Rolex.

Precisely

[Seo]

Originally Posted by Commander C.

As far as I know, none of the watch YouTubers have acknowledged the 32XX issue either, even though I'm pretty sure they are aware of the complaints, if only because I've asked several of them to comment on the issue. I assume they don't want to risk provoking the ire of Rolex.

Even the "I'm a former RSC watchmaker" or "I'm a former RSC manager" people refuse to answer questions related to this.

[CedCraig]

Worn&Wound mentioned the issue in two articles about a year ago but then crickets.

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by moby

hello, bit of advice about my batgirl..watch is 2020 and i thought was running fine at +2 a day. Recently tested for power reserve by winding and walking for 6 miles. Thought that would put a full wind into the watch but it ran for 56 hours and not the stated 70 or so hours. Don't have access to a timegrapher unfortunately. Will repeat the test but whats the communities thoughts on this?

Walking won't wind your watch unless you swing your arms a lot.

[77T]

It's an interesting issue about 6 mile walks. On average, a person takes about 2,000 steps to walk one mile. Therefore, for a 6-mile walk, an average male would take approximately 12,000 steps.

That means the watch gets 6,000 arm swings of about 60° per swing.

Maybe a watchmaker can do the rotor math using Rolex's specs - but if 12,000 steps per day won't fully wind a mainspring, then the horology designers need some better technology (or switch to quartz and close their movement atelier).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[krounchou]

Just went to Rolex AD to have my 126610LN checked. They said it was delaying a bit and adjusted it… let’s see how it goes. I still have 3 years left of warranty so I will monitor it

[77T]

That's interesting about your AD opening up the watch for an adjustment. I hope they gave you a service statement for your files.

Why?

First off, it helps you begin to document any service work to remediate performance. Since we can't see into the future, and the movement may need future interventions, you can provide proof if RSC declines warranty service to fully remedy a problem during the upcoming 3 years.

Second, to prove the watch was opened only by a certified watchmaker at an AD. Without that you don't have proof some donk didn't do the work.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[krounchou]

You make a point. I have not received any proof of service. My AD is a Rolex Only AD. It does service on watches onsite so I am not too concerned. I believe everything is logged on their system.
Edit: I have looked on my basic iPhone timegrapher and it now is in the 0.5s accuracy per day but with a 230 amplitude

[robo_robb]

Could I pick someone’s brain in this thread— do you think the 22xx movement found in the OP 34 is susceptible to the same issues as the 32xx movement? The 22xx doesn’t have the chronergy escapement.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by robo_robb

Could I pick someone’s brain in this thread— do you think the 22xx movement found in the OP 34 is susceptible to the same issues as the 32xx movement? The 22xx doesn’t have the chronergy escapement.

Who knows
It hasn't been explored and probably because it's not as mainstream as the 32xx.
Your proposition merits some consideration, as it seems there is a minimum amount of Amplitude which is required for reliable movement performance across a reasonable expected service interval.
Movements with the Chronergy escapement start out with a deficite and can unexpectedly slide down hill rather quickly for some unknown reason.

After all, other watch manufacturers seem to be able to achieve elevated performance targets without too much difficulty, with the exception of promoting outrageous service interval periods like 10 years. At the end of the day, the escapement isn't the only part of the movement which requires servicing in a timely manner and a good nunber of 32xx movements aren't getting out of the warranry period without developing timekeeping issues
This has been discussed in the context of the Omega Co-axial with no absolute conclusions except that the possibility exists that the Co-axial escapement may have been an answer to a question that nobody in the mainstream was really asking.
It's all very interesting though and then we have the service intervals for the GS high beat equivalent which are more in keeping with reduced service interval timeframes.
But i digress, though it's all food for thought

[PO.Victory]

Originally Posted by robo_robb

Could I pick someone’s brain in this thread— do you think the 22xx movement found in the OP 34 is susceptible to the same issues as the 32xx movement? The 22xx doesn’t have the chronergy escapement.

I wondered the same thing and the following feedback: https://www.watchuseek.com/threads/o.../post-56544339

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by robo_robb

Could I pick someone’s brain in this thread— do you think the 22xx movement found in the OP 34 is susceptible to the same issues as the 32xx movement? The 22xx doesn’t have the chronergy escapement.

This may answer your 22xx question?

[Srge01]

Same problem here .
DS from 2019 worn only a couple of times over the 5 years .
The last 2 years never worn .
Now the amplitude is at 230 fully wound and runs 11 sec to slow went to the AD to let her regulate …
After the regulation watch was running some hours very accurate but after 12 hours it went up to -8 sec…
Now the DS is on the way to cologne …guarantee ended in Februar ��

[tothemoon]

For those who sent it into RSC for service, did the low amplitude problem ever come back?

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by tothemoon

For those who sent it into RSC for service, did the low amplitude problem ever come back?

Yes.